Welcome Guest! If you are already a member of the BMW MOA, please log in to the forum in the upper right hand corner of this page. Check "Remember Me?" if you wish to stay logged in.

We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMWMOA forum provides.
Why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on
the forum, the club magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMWMOA offers?Want to read the MOA monthly magazine for free? Take a 3-month test ride of the magazine; check here for details.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will need to join the MOA before you can post: click this register link to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

NOTE. Some content will be hidden from you. If you want to view all content, you must register for the forum if you are not a member, or if a member, you must be logged in.

It's a good question because they're made of the same bones but having ridden a GTL for several hundred miles and now own a GT for over 1,500 - they are different bikes from the rider's perspective. The ergos are different, the GT with a sportier more athletic seating position. The windscreen on the GT is smaller and more streamlined. The seat is different where the GTL is more like a Goldwing seat and the GT still very comfortable but again, more suited to athletic use of the bike. The ESA II functions differently on the two bikes. The bike permits a selection of comfort, normal, and sport but the set up is different on the two bikes. The GTL comfort is softer than the GT; the GTL normal is the GT comfort; and the GTL sport is the GT normal setting. The GT can be set one stiffer/sporty in it's sport mode. The GT has a higher speed limiter than the GTL.

And if all that's not enough of a different, the GT is the only available in Vermillion Red, a really beautiful color that reminds me of the original Candy Apple Brick Red that Honda painted the original CBX. The frames and wheels are also darker on the GT than the GTL.

They're both amazing bikes but I can totally see why they picked the GT in #1 place and the GTL in #4 - but then I'm a bit biased

It's a good question because they're made of the same bones but having ridden a GTL for several hundred miles and now own a GT for over 1,500 - they are different bikes from the rider's perspective. The ergos are different, the GT with a sportier more athletic seating position. The windscreen on the GT is smaller and more streamlined. The seat is different where the GTL is more like a Goldwing seat and the GT still very comfortable but again, more suited to athletic use of the bike. The ESA II functions differently on the two bikes. The bike permits a selection of comfort, normal, and sport but the set up is different on the two bikes. The GTL comfort is softer than the GT; the GTL normal is the GT comfort; and the GTL sport is the GT normal setting. The GT can be set one stiffer/sporty in it's sport mode. The GT has a higher speed limiter than the GTL.

And if all that's not enough of a different, the GT is the only available in Vermillion Red, a really beautiful color that reminds me of the original Candy Apple Brick Red that Honda painted the original CBX. The frames and wheels are also darker on the GT than the GTL.

They're both amazing bikes but I can totally see why they picked the GT in #1 place and the GTL in #4 - but then I'm a bit biased

Thanks for the great response. It is a bummer that my leg length won't accommodate the GT then. Another beemer made for tall riders. Not a complaint, just a fact. I guess I now know what I will be missing!

Most of the voters for the BOTY are from Europe. Preferred riding style there is different than in the U.S. and I can see why they lean towards the GT. While the bikes are very similar, the GT can be perceived as smaller, nimbler and sportier than its sibling. I can't say anything about an actual riding comparison and PittsDriver's description is quite elaborate, but I sat on both bikes at a dealership and I CAN NOT sit on a GTL. I am only 5-8 but the seating position was much too cramped for me on the low seat of the GTL. O.K., the seat is adjustable and you "can order" (try to order anything on the new 16s!) the high seat, but the seating position on the GT fit me so much better, I couldn't believe it.
I still wish, they would have made the GT even a little lighter and sportier to distinguish it more from the GTL. Considering that the GTL replaces the LT and the GT is intended to replace the K1300GT (?) they should have been set up accordingly.

Oh, and - by the way - the correct color name for the 1979/80 Honda CBX was Candy Glory Red. I have one. The BMW Vermillion Red is quite a bit darker.

Most of the voters for the BOTY are from Europe. Preferred riding style there is different than in the U.S. and I can see why they lean towards the GT. While the bikes are very similar, the GT can be perceived as smaller, nimbler and sportier than its sibling. I can't say anything about an actual riding comparison and PittsDriver's description is quite elaborate, but I sat on both bikes at a dealership and I CAN NOT sit on a GTL. I am only 5-8 but the seating position was much too cramped for me on the low seat of the GTL. O.K., the seat is adjustable and you "can order" (try to order anything on the new 16s!) the high seat, but the seating position on the GT fit me so much better, I couldn't believe it.
I still wish, they would have made the GT even a little lighter and sportier to distinguish it more from the GTL. Considering that the GTL replaces the LT and the GT is intended to replace the K1300GT (?) they should have been set up accordingly.

Oh, and - by the way - the correct color name for the 1979/80 Honda CBX was Candy Glory Red. I have one. The BMW Vermillion Red is quite a bit darker.

I too am 5'8" with a 29" (generous "on a good day" estimate) leg inseam. did you purchase a GT? I have a R1200RT, and that is a stretch for me, even with a low seat. So I figured the extra weight, at that same height, would pose even a greater problem.

Are you talking about the seating position or the reach to the ground?
I find the seating position excellent. The reach is O.K. , but I don't necessarily insist on being flatfooted with both feet. I have a couple of other bikes that do not provide me with that position. I ride my 99 RT with the seat in the middle position.

Thanks for the great response. It is a bummer that my leg length won't accommodate the GT then. Another beemer made for tall riders. Not a complaint, just a fact. I guess I now know what I will be missing!

I'm 5'9" with a 30" inseam and with the low GT seat I can just about flat foot the bike (seat height is a little less than 30" with this seat in the standard position). It can also be quickly adjusted up a little more than an inch by flipping a plate under the seat. No tools required for the adjustment and it can be done in less than 30 seconds. Around town, I like being able to get my feet on the ground solidly. On the road or an all day ride, I can flip it up and get a slightly better knee angle. Overall, this is a great solution for people with short legs like me.

I briefly owned a R1200RT a year ago, and now a K1600GTL. I find the GTL to not be as: high (seatwise and otherwise), top heavy, tippy, and generally more confortable. The standard 1pc low seat seems too low as I'd rather extend my legs more. My fix will be a slightly taller seat, maybe footpeg lowering adapters, and certainly forward bars to change positions. Height 5'9", 29.5" inseam.

The other thing is that like all Boxers the RT frame reacts to torque and rolls sideways with rpm changes. The quicker the change, the quicker the roll. That can lead to the tippy feeling at high seat heights at low road speeds. The K1600 is well behaved in that regard.

Go sit and the ergos (for better or worse) will soon be readily apparent.